Could we perhaps start a wiki page to collect information on how every country classifies roads? Something like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence but intended for the global community instead of the local mappers? More detail and less non-english text.
On 23 February 2018 at 20:11, Fernando Trebien <fernando.treb...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm glad it is not so much of a problem in Czechia and I hope it would > rarely be a problem anywhere. > > In any case, the idea can be developed further. Matej raises some > interesting points that can account for better classification. For > example, we could add some bias towards regional and/or national > routes, in order to avoid shortcuts (though not forbid them completely > if they are significant); likewise, we could add some bias to > infrastructure, such as pavement quality, signage quality, feasibility > for large vehicles (such as trucks), etc. > > Most interesting I think is to share with the global community how the > local community understands classification. Are access rights really > important to the map user, or is it only important to mappers? If so, > why can't the renderer parse access tags to decide how to represent > the way? (I believe that was the intention when motorroad=* was > proposed.) > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 3:29 PM, djakk djakk <djakk.dj...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Don’t worry, when the official system is good, lik in Czechia, it matches > > Fernando’s suggestion :) > > > > djakk > > > > > > Le ven. 23 févr. 2018 à 18:32, Matej Lieskovský < > lieskovsky.ma...@gmail.com> > > a écrit : > >> > >> Don't get me wrong, this system might work well for countries without an > >> official system, but what do you expect to happen in the EU? > >> Will we have "highway=primary" + "class=tertiary" because some random > road > >> happens to be a shortcut? Or do you expect us in Czechia to use > "class=II" > >> while germans use "class=S" so that it actually matches the signage? > Will > >> the renderer parse ref numbers (and ignore the main tag) or will we > receive > >> hundreds of complaints about some section of the road having (what every > >> local resident will consider to be) the wrong class? > >> > >> How do you determine "important cities" when even the line between towns > >> and cities is country-dependant? Or is using administrative differences > only > >> not OK for roads? > >> > >> Even Waze actually follows local administration. > >> > >> > >> Long story short: I am strongly against deploying this system in > countries > >> with a functioning official classification system. > >> > >> On 23 February 2018 at 18:06, Fernando Trebien > >> <fernando.treb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> Administrative classification is not strictly related everywhere to > >>> signage, structure and access rights. > >>> > >>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:12 PM, djakk djakk <djakk.dj...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > I know that « trunk » is country-dependent but why not moving it to > a > >>> > worldwide definition ? Administrative classification could be moved > to > >>> > other > >>> > tags :) > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > djakk > >>> > > >>> > Le ven. 23 févr. 2018 à 16:06, Matej Lieskovský > >>> > <lieskovsky.ma...@gmail.com> > >>> > a écrit : > >>> >> > >>> >> Greetings > >>> >> I'd like to caution against using this system globally. In Czechia, > >>> >> roads > >>> >> are formally classified into classes, which influence signage, ref > >>> >> numbers > >>> >> and so on. Deploying this system here would make the tag > >>> >> confusing/useless > >>> >> and would likely face enormous backlash. I have no problems with > using > >>> >> this > >>> >> system in countries without a clearly defined road classification, > but > >>> >> please don't touch the countries where there is no doubt about what > >>> >> class > >>> >> any given road is. > >>> >> Happy mapping! > >>> >> > >>> >> On 22 February 2018 at 16:20, djakk djakk <djakk.dj...@gmail.com> > >>> >> wrote: > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Hello, > >>> >>> > >>> >>> I totally agree with you, the definition you provide, > >>> >>> administrative-free, tends to the same osm map between countries. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> djakk > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Le jeu. 15 févr. 2018 à 19:18, Fernando Trebien > >>> >>> <fernando.treb...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Landing on this discussion several months late. I've just heard of > >>> >>>> it > >>> >>>> by reading a wiki talk page [1]. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Since 13 February 2009, the wiki [2] criticises highway > >>> >>>> classification > >>> >>>> as problematic/unverifiable. This has also been subject to a lot > of > >>> >>>> controversy (and edit wars) in my local community (Brazil), > >>> >>>> especially > >>> >>>> regarding the effect of (lack of) pavement. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> In trying to achieve greater consensus some years ago, I decided > to > >>> >>>> seek opinions elsewhere and finally I arrived at this scheme [3] > >>> >>>> which > >>> >>>> I think is very useful, if not perfect yet. It can be easily > >>> >>>> summarised like this: > >>> >>>> - trunk: best routes between large/important cities > >>> >>>> - primary: best routes between cities and above > >>> >>>> - secondary: best routes between towns/suburbs and above > >>> >>>> - tertiary: best routes between villages/neighbourhoods and above > >>> >>>> - unclassified: best routes between other place=* and above > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> For example, the best route between two villages would be at least > >>> >>>> tertiary. So would be the best route between a village and a town > or > >>> >>>> a > >>> >>>> city. Parts of this route might have a higher class in case they > are > >>> >>>> part of a route between more important places. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> It surely raises the problem of determining optimal routes. Maybe > a > >>> >>>> sensible criterion would be average travel time without traffic > >>> >>>> congestion. A number of vehicles may be selected for this average > - > >>> >>>> could be motorcycle+car+bus+truck, or simply car+truck. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Early results in my area [4, in Portuguese] seem promising and > have > >>> >>>> produced more consensus than any previous proposals. To me, this > >>> >>>> method seems to: > >>> >>>> - resist alternations in classification along the same road > >>> >>>> - work across borders (where classification discontinuities are > >>> >>>> expected because each country is using different classification > >>> >>>> criteria) > >>> >>>> - account for road network topology > >>> >>>> - work in countries with mostly precarious/unpaved roads or > >>> >>>> without/unknown official highway classes > >>> >>>> - work between settlements as well as within settlements > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Borderline cases are probably inescapable in any system that does > >>> >>>> not > >>> >>>> use solely criteria that are directly verifiable - from the > ground, > >>> >>>> or > >>> >>>> from the law. Maybe, in certain developed countries, the system is > >>> >>>> so > >>> >>>> well organized that merely checking signs/laws is sufficient. That > >>> >>>> does not mean it is like that everywhere on the planet. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> OSM has so far received a lot of input from communities in > developed > >>> >>>> countries (mostly Europe, North America and Australia) and hasn't > >>> >>>> given much attention to less developed/organized countries. What > >>> >>>> comes > >>> >>>> closest to this is what the HOT Team does, but the judgment of > road > >>> >>>> classification one can do from satellite images in a foreign > country > >>> >>>> is much more limited than the criteria that have been raised in > this > >>> >>>> thread so far. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> I wouldn't endorse tags such as maxspeed:practical due to lack of > >>> >>>> verifiability (it should be obvious that different types of > vehicles > >>> >>>> would achieve different practical speeds). It is better to use the > >>> >>>> legal speed in maxspeed=* and describe the practical reason for a > >>> >>>> lower speed using surface=*, smoothness=*, and, who knows, maybe > the > >>> >>>> not yet approved hazard=* [5] (though that is intended for signed > >>> >>>> hazards, not subjective/opinionated hazards). > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> For the sake of long-term sanity, I also wouldn't mix the purpose > of > >>> >>>> one tag with the purpose of other tags. To describe the surface, > >>> >>>> there > >>> >>>> is surface=*, smoothness=* and tracktype=*. To describe access > >>> >>>> rights, > >>> >>>> there is access=*, foot=*, bicycle=*, motor_vehicle=*, etc. To > >>> >>>> describe legal speed, maxspeed=*. To describe curves, there's > >>> >>>> geometry. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> Purpose, perhaps, is the main issue. What is the purpose of > highway > >>> >>>> classification? Is it to save us the work of adding extra tags? Is > >>> >>>> it > >>> >>>> to allow the renderer to produce a cleaner output at low zoom > >>> >>>> levels? > >>> >>>> Is it to allow routers to assume default speeds? Maybe to guide > >>> >>>> their > >>> >>>> routing heuristics? Is it to express some sort of importance? If > so, > >>> >>>> by which perspective - urbanistic, traffic engineering, movement, > >>> >>>> commercial value, cultural/fame, historic, some combination of > >>> >>>> those? > >>> >>>> Should the purpose be the same in every country? > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> It may be interesting to also discuss the classification adopted > by > >>> >>>> other maps. I don't have a reference for Google (originally > >>> >>>> TeleAtlas) > >>> >>>> or Here.com (originally Navteq), but Waze publishes its > per-country > >>> >>>> road classification criteria in its wiki. [6-16] > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> [1] > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway% > 3Dtrunk#change_.22high_performance.22_to_.22high_importance.22 > >>> >>>> [2] > >>> >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability# > Problematic_tags > >>> >>>> [3] > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ftrebien/Drafts/ > Generic_highway_classification_principles#Schematic_diagram_and_general_ > comments > >>> >>>> [4] https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=674296# > p674296 > >>> >>>> [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard > >>> >>>> [6] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/USA/Road_types > >>> >>>> [7] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/UnitedKingdom/Roads#Road_ > types > >>> >>>> [8] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Canada/Main_Page#Road_Types > >>> >>>> [9] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Commons/Road_Types/India > >>> >>>> [10] > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Brazil/Como_categorizar_ > e_nomear_vias > >>> >>>> [11] > >>> >>>> https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Germany/Kartenlegende_( > Deutschland) > >>> >>>> [12] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/France/Classification_ > France > >>> >>>> [13] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Italy/Tipologia_delle_ > strade > >>> >>>> [14] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Indonesia/Panduan_Tipe_ > Jalan > >>> >>>> [15] https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7%B1%BB%E5% > 9E%8B > >>> >>>> [16] > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/%E3%80%8C%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7% > A8%AE%E5%88%A5%E3%80%8D > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> -- > >>> >>>> Fernando Trebien > >>> >>>> +55 (51) 99962-5409 > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> "Nullius in verba." > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>> >>>> talk mailing list > >>> >>>> talk@openstreetmap.org > >>> >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> >>> talk mailing list > >>> >>> talk@openstreetmap.org > >>> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > talk mailing list > >>> > talk@openstreetmap.org > >>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Fernando Trebien > >>> +55 (51) 9962-5409 > >>> > >>> "Nullius in verba." > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Fernando Trebien > +55 (51) 9962-5409 > > "Nullius in verba." >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
